Creationists: Can you explain Pseudo-Genes?

Question

About 75% of the human genome consists of useless junk that can't be used for building proteins because it is missing key sections. The prevailing theory among biologists is that these pseudo-genes are the result of RNA transcription errors - the natural product of our imperfect gene copying mechanism making many copies over many millions of years.
The chances of getting that many errors in the past 6,000 years is about the same as the chances of a new species of turkey evolving in time for Thanksgiving.

So I'm wondering, since you know better than any biologist how life emerged: Why did God, who makes no mistakes, create Adam with all this useless crap in his DNA? Was it another way of "testing our faith", just like those phony dinosaur bones?

In fact, the pseudo-genes are turning out to be very useful - in showing us the history of our species over the past few million years. There are bits of all sorts of prehistoric retro-viruses in there; really fascinating stuff. But if the earth is only 6000 years old, then none of that history really happened. So I'm asking, how did all that stuff get there?

No, I'm not expecting any Creationists to suddenly snap out of it because I presented a little bit more evidence. My purpose in asking this was purely for entertainment; and the fruits of my efforts can be seen in the responses of MamaBear and others. Sorry, not to make fun of you or anything, but... Well, okay, pretty much to make fun of you.

See, I have faith in Creationists. Whatever new evidence is presented, it will either be "just a theory" or you will find some fascinating way of modifying it to fit your beliefs, and then put wax in your ears.

Thanks for the laughs.
-ak

Wow, I'm really impressed that one of you is able to copy and paste something that you do not remotely understand.

Gandreal:
"First I take it you have never programed before!"
You take it incorrectly. Pseudogenes are legacy code which has been commented out. My question is, why did your "intelligent programmer" need to write legacy code, or comment anything out? Shouldn't he have written it correctly the first time?

Answer 1

Oh come now, asking a creationist to think is like asking a dog to sprout wings and fly. All it does is confuse them and make them irritated.
Some of them actually thing (and I'm not making this up) that ALL mutations are bad for the following generations, and that there are NO examples (again, I'm not making this s hit up) of positive mutations.
I mean with ignorance that staggering, do you honestly think that some knowledge will change them?
Nope.

Answer 2

you answered your own question it is a theory as to what we call juk genes are. A theory, isn't it about time scientists develop an i do not know yet file and not act as if theory is relevant. I am guessing my own "I do not know" theory---they are not junk, instead they have a purpose currently unknown. this idea put forth by christians that we've only been around 6000 years is also a theory. We don't know. The Bible leaves gaps everywhere and never perports to be a chronological history. Never says the garden was on earth the only undenyable impression it leaves is that there was inteligent design and that God was involved.

Answer 3

First, I protest the abusive tone you take in your question. There is no call for it!

Second, I question your claim of "75%" of the human genome being useless junk! Where did you get that number? Last I knew, geneticists had not yet fully decoded the human genome, to even know which strand of DNA caused, say brown hair vs red vs blond, or which piece of DNA caused diabetes. So where do you get the 75%?

Third, you are basing your question on a hypothesis, NOT A THEOREM. Bad idea.

Fourth, have you ever heard of the term "geographical isolation" in regards to genetics? How about "mutation"? How about "sport"? How about "chemical abuse"? Humans are not the same creatures now, as we were 7-10 thousand years ago. Mutation of the human genome started with the Fall, and has been going on full-tilt ever since. I don't believe that God "created Adam with all of this useless crap in his DNA". More likely, that certain environmental factors (radiation, changes in environment/weather, genetic isolation, chemical exposure, etc.) have introduced some non-lethal damage to the human genome.

And again, I reject both your 75% figure, as well as the necessity of millions of years for genetic change!

Answer 4

Well, a lot of that doesn't code for anything in order to act as a "cushion" for functioning genes. Read how old people used to be back in Genesis, they were considered young men at 100! Maybe those now-defunct genes allowed them to live longer. Besides, you are forgetting that God placed a number of curses on man, limiting their ages to our modern time limit. Maybe that is part of the reason why ancient dragonflies are so much larger than their offspring today. However, since there is no way to test this, we quietly rest ourselves in the confidence of the historical, prophetical, and scientific evidence of the Bible. Make my day, ask me for some. Now, go out and demonstrate that abiogenesis does occur.
By the way, whoever said Dinosaur bones were phony? Surely you don't mean to slander us by putting words into our mouths?

Answer 5

I don't know what to say? The fact that you used the word evidence 2 or 3 times and then referred to psuedo-genes when you yourself have no idea what they are for? or their reason... Oh, I get it now, You think since some guy (who also has no idea what they are for) questions it, it must be evidence because basically the human scientist knows everything??? hahahahahaahahaahahhaahahaahahaha you must be an intellectual... I don't know what they are used for but the sad fact is neither do you. Where they came from? God... He has his reasons. You think they serve no purpose. But you don't really know do you?

So here is a question, "if an atheist has an intellectual thought and there is no one else there to tell it to does it still mean he was wrong?"

Answer 6

Let's assume this test is for an honest, courageous, clear thinking person.
Step one: Pretend to know nothing about the Bible. Start reading as if it were true. By the time you start the second creation story in chapter two of Genesis, and see how it contradicts chapter one, all belief is gone.
Step two; Notice what the exact downfall of humanity is; being asked to be moral without knowledge of good and evil (they only had that after eating the fruit). So God does not want us to know good from evil, but reserves the right to punish us for evil.

Thus, Abrahamic religion is both anti-intellectual and anti-morality. If you beat the odds and get a "believer" to understand your question, will they answer honestly?

Answer 7

I find it funny, that people are so polarized when it comes to questions like this. You have some that are so convinced that people of any religion just blindly follow precepts and words with blind faith. Whereas people whom do have some belief are not as nearly angry sounding. It seems to me, people whom have no faith seem to be angry at those who do because they can't understand why. A fairly literate person reads an article about a biological subject, and suddenly he/she is an expert. What I say is...prove God doesn't exist. If science is your be all end all, prove it. And spare us these piddly attempts at slamming people of faith. We are all going to end up the same...dead. I guess we'll see then won't we? As for me and my house, we shall serve the Lord.

Answer 8

I cant explain it but you cant either. Believing evolution is like believing you could scatter aircraft parts in the desert and having a sand storm come through, and when it was all over there would be a fully functioning air worthy 747 left behind. What are the odds of that? hmmm?

Answer 9

Pilgrim beat me to it. It is simple arrogance on the part of anyone (christian or atheist) to believe that they understand or know enough about human genetics to state that "75% of the human genome consists of useless junk that can't be used..." Even the top geneticists in the world will admit that the field is in its infancy.

Answer 10

Only about 2% of the human chromosome is understood. Sounds to me like a situation similar to an infant not comprehending the importance of the Encyclopedia Britannia.

Since copies have been made since God created Adam, evidently God did something right, and your boys just don't understand it.

Maybe that "useless junk" is pretty useful after all.